What makes a book immoral?

[Baelor]

There are many threads on this forum about specific books, movies, TV shows, and so forth, that almost invariably end in heated and unproductive discussions.

The reason is immediately identifiable: the arguments in these discussions have no common basis. They lack foundation, so the discussions get nowhere.

This thread is an attempt to remedy this. Please keep the discussion suitably general unless specific works of art are used illustratively.

Certain things are clearly immoral – pornography, for instance. The USCCB document "Renewing the Mind of the Media" may also be useful.

Some guiding questions:

1. Does art have a particular responsibility? May it serve several functions?
2. What aspects of literature (authorial intent, effect of the book, etc.) should be factored into the discussion?
3. What content, if any is impermissible? What tones or styles, if any, are impermissible?
4. What role does the individual conscience play in the morality of literature?

Please keep this discussion rigorous. For example, I know that a frequent detractor of modern works of art posts the guidelines of the Catholic Writer’s Guild as a reference, which is certainly useful. This poster, however, consistently ignores requests to specify how one may determine whether a work meets these criteria, and thus he fails to be sufficiently rigorous when discussing whether a work is immoral.

I hope that this thread will promote more productive discussions on other threads.

 

[minion]

My sole indicator for this, is when vices are portrayed as virtues.

Otherwise, I feel anything goes, and nothing should be censored.

 

[Baelor]

My sole indicator for this, is when vices are portrayed as virtues.

How can one tell when this is occurring?

 

[Katarina90]

decentfilms.com/articles/decentfilms

This site should tell you everything you need to know.

 

[Georgiana_X]

Just a quick, spontaneous answer to this would be that I’d consider a piece of writing (a novel, for example, or short story) to be immoral if the characters who have committed sins are neither penitent or punished somehow. In other words, if they rewarded by immoral behavior, then I consider the whole text to be so. An example of this would be Sister Carrie by Theodore Dreiser.

 

[dshix]

Another indication which is very useful as to whether the intention is good or not, and which adds on to what others have said, is if* the bad guy or evil in the film is depicted as such and is punished in the end*. The the evil gets away or doesn’t get defeated by the end of the book (or series, if it’s a series they should be defeated by the last book) then the aim of the story is often disordered.

 

[Baelor]

decentfilms.com/articles/decentfilms

This site should tell you everything you need to know.

Great site! Very insightful; thank you.

Just a quick, spontaneous answer to this would be that I’d consider a piece of writing (a novel, for example, or short story) to be immoral if the characters who have committed sins are neither penitent or punished somehow. In other words, if they rewarded by immoral behavior, then I consider the whole text to be so.

You are not the first to mention this criterion, and I certainly understand from where it comes, but it seems odd to me – in real life, no one is perfect, and I am not necessarily punished in this life for every bad thing I do. Why is this necessary in fiction, then?

 

[Katarina90]

To elaborate on the above point, might I add my own opinion?

In real life, yes, many MANY times people get away with doing dreadful things unpunished. It’s a sad truth. To me, the important factor lies in; if these deeds go unpunished, is it still evident that such deeds are undesirable, immoral, or villainous? If a character never gets his just desserts, why? Is it a novel trying to portray the modern world, where things like homosexuality are in some cases a norm?

TO me, it’s not so much a matter of “it’s ok if they’re punished, not ok if they’re not.” It’s more a factor of, why is this immoral behavior here? Are they promoting an agenda, inciting lust, spreading propoganda? or, is it healthy, measured realism?

 

[Georgiana_X]

Great site! Very insightful; thank you.

You are not the first to mention this criterion, and I certainly understand from where it comes, but it seems odd to me – in real life, no one is perfect, and I am not necessarily punished in this life for every bad thing I do. Why is this necessary in fiction, then?

You posed a question about fiction, not real life. Your question was…what makes a book (by which I understood you to mean fiction) immoral? I was replying to that question and not “real life”. In “real life” I am not punished for every bad thing I do, although I go to confession and am forgiven by God. “Real life” is entirely different from what makes a book immoral.

Again, I understood your question to mean fiction, although other genres could certainly fall into the character of immoral literature. When characters in fiction commit immoral acts and either benefit in some way or go unpunished, then I would view that as promoting or encouraging or condoning that behavior. Furthermore, when an immoral character is portrayed in such a way as to appear sympathetic or heroic, I would also view that text as immoral.

If you are going to expand the discussion to include what makes “real life” immoral, then I would defer that to someone with a more theological background and ultimately to God Almighty.

 

[LoveMyHeart]

Just a quick, spontaneous answer to this would be that I’d consider a piece of writing (a novel, for example, or short story) to be immoral if the characters who have committed sins are neither penitent or punished somehow. In other words, if they rewarded by immoral behavior, then I consider the whole text to be so. An example of this would be Sister Carrie by Theodore Dreiser.

Agreed!:thumbsup:I’ve read many books where often the characters are not punished for their sins and I Find this extremely unacceptable in my personal below. A book should resolve iin helping those characters to be turned from them sins or at least repent. It seems these people who write the books don’t think about those aspects.

 

[Baelor]

You posed a question about fiction, not real life.

I did indeed!

Your question was…what makes a book (by which I understood you to mean fiction) immoral? I was replying to that question and not “real life”. In “real life” I am not punished for every bad thing I do, although I go to confession and am forgiven by God. “Real life” is entirely different from what makes a book immoral.

That is fine, but I am curious as to why you feel that fiction must portray its events in that way. As I said, I am looking for a rigorous discussion.

It seems that fiction frequently does involve realistic scenarios, or depictions of reality. If you disagree, fine – the question remains, why does every bad action in a work of fiction have to be punished?

Again, I understood your question to mean fiction, although other genres could certainly fall into the character of immoral literature. When characters in fiction commit immoral acts and either benefit in some way or go unpunished, then I would view that as promoting or encouraging or condoning that behavior.

Why?

Furthermore, when an immoral character is portrayed in such a way as to appear sympathetic or heroic, I would also view that text as immoral.

I agree, with a specification: when a character is portrayed as sympathetic or heroic by virtue of immoral actions or those actions are not problematized, then the text is questionable.

 

[Katarina90]

Agreed!:thumbsup:I’ve read many books where often the characters are not punished for their sins and I Find this extremely unacceptable in my personal below. A book should resolve iin helping those characters to be turned from them sins or at least repent. It seems these people who write the books don’t think about those aspects.

A sa writer, that is extremely shallow, narrow minded and, from a literary standpoint, dull. Not everyone is a wonderful little saint who’s going to repent. That’s not how life is. Fiction isn’t just about fulfilling your fantasies for a perfect Catholic Utopia. It’s about portraying believable and realistic scenarios as well. Since when is a good immoral for portraying real life? Besides, such a ridiculous criteria limits ones list of acceptable literature to only Christian or Christian based literature, since many religions, cultures and historical eras of the world do not or did not have the same criteria of sin.

 

[Georgiana_X]

I did indeed!

That is fine, but I am curious as to why you feel that fiction must portray its events in that way. As I said, I am looking for a rigorous discussion.

It seems that fiction frequently does involve realistic scenarios, or depictions of reality. If you disagree, fine – the question remains, why does every bad action in a work of fiction have to be punished?

I agree, with a specification: when a character is portrayed as sympathetic or heroic by virtue of immoral actions or those actions are not problematized, then the text is questionable.

Portray events in what way? I am not aware of setting out any guidelines for fiction writing. I remarked that “real life” should not be confused with your question about what makes a “book” immoral. Fiction is written for different purposes and different genres. Conflict of some sort is necessary for the purposes of constructing a plot. It’s difficult, maybe not impossible, to think of a conflict that wouldn’t be immoral in some way which would actually keep a reader engaged.

I did not say that “every bad action in a work of fiction has to be punished.” It doesn’t. Many interesting and satisfying books fall into the category of unresolved conflicts, many of them immoral. To be honest, many of my favorite books are ones that can be considered as immoral or have been banned as such.

I am not making a judgement; you asked for a discussion about what makes a book immoral. Maybe the first question to tackle would be…what is the purpose of literature? Or better yet, OP, what do you consider as immoral?

To repeat, I am not suggesting that immoral books not be written and read. I was responding to a very broad question.

 

[Baelor]

Portray events in what way? I am not aware of setting out any guidelines for fiction writing.

But you did:

You:

I’d consider a piece of writing (a novel, for example, or short story) to be immoral if the characters who have committed sins are neither penitent or punished somehow

I remarked that “real life” should not be confused with your question about what makes a “book” immoral. Fiction is written for different purposes and different genres.

How do you justify the complete separation of real life and fiction vis-a-vis content? Historical novels, most obviously, play off a representation of real life. Even alternate histories, fantasy novels, and so forth that involve humans involve humans.

I did not say that “every bad action in a work of fiction has to be punished.” It doesn’t.

You did:

You:

I’d consider a piece of writing (a novel, for example, or short story) to be immoral if the characters who have committed sins are neither penitent or punished somehow

If that is not what you meant, I am happy to hear your clarification.

 

[Baelor]

Also a good reference:

Inter Mirifica from Vatican II.

On the purpose of art:
IM:

1. The Church recognizes that these media, if properly utilized, can be of great service to mankind, since they greatly contribute to men’s entertainment and instruction as well as to the spread and support of the Kingdom of God. The Church recognizes, too, that men can employ these media contrary to the plan of the Creator and to their own loss. Indeed, the Church experiences maternal grief at the harm all too often done to society by their evil use.

1. The second question deals with the relationship between the rights, as they are called, of art and the norms of morality. Since the mounting controversies in this area frequently take their rise from false teachings about ethics and esthetics, the Council proclaims that all must hold to the absolute primacy of the objective moral order, that is, this order by itself surpasses and fittingly coordinates all other spheres of human affairs-the arts not excepted-even though they be endowed with notable dignity. For man who is endowed by God with the gift of reason and summoned to pursue a lofty destiny, is alone affected by the moral order in his entire being. And likewise, if man resolutely and faithfully upholds this order, he will be brought to the attainment of complete perfection and happiness.

1. Finally, the narration, description or portrayal of moral evil, even through the media of social communication, can indeed serve to bring about a deeper knowledge and study of humanity and, with the aid of appropriately heightened dramatic effects, can reveal and glorify the grand dimensions of truth and goodness. Nevertheless, such presentations ought always to be subject to moral restraint, lest they work to the harm rather than the benefit of souls, particularly when there is question of treating matters which deserve reverent handling or which, given the baneful effect of original sin in men, could quite readily arouse base desires in them.

 

[Georgiana_X]

In the first place, you asked what makes a book immoral. Maybe I shouldn’t have presumed that you meant fiction, but I jumped to that conclusion. I’ll leave it at that so that I can provide the clarification you requested.

I stand by my original answer that I gave… “I’d consider a piece of writing (a novel, for example, or a short story) to be immoral when the characters who have committed sins are neither penitent nor punished somehow.” I have taken the liberty of correcting my faulty grammar since I keep seeing my quote reposted.

Yes, that is what I would consider to be the makings of an immoral book. However, you have proceeded to restate that quote in your subsequent post to read “every bad action in a work of fiction has to be punished.” Those are your words, not mine, as I generally don’t make blanket statements about literature and would never say something like that. As I have already clarified in my previous post, I disagree with your restatement because I do NOT believe that every bad action in a work of fiction has to be punished. Your restatement would only hold true if one believed all fiction must be moral. I repeat…I was giving an answer to what makes a book immoral. I was not taking a stand on whether a book should always be moral or not. Furthermore, I was not, as another poster has been, distinguishing between moral culpability and situational ethics. I gave a general answer to a broad question. Maybe the best answer to your question of what makes a book immoral would be the person who wrote it. Does that extend to the reader of the book? Society?

I have also respected your wishes so far as to not name certain works as examples, but I will do so at this point. John Milton’s Lucifer in “Paradise Lost” is portrayed as a sympathetic character. Is this text immoral? Is Joyce’s Ullyses an immoral book because of the language? Is Aristotle’s definition of perfect literature as “preserving the unities” any less credible because he was a pagan? Is it immoral? Not amoral but immoral?

Am I to understand from your references to Vatican 2 that you are considering morality from a religious standpoint? Also, OP, will you give us the benefit in your own words of what you mean by “immoral”? I have no choice but to defer to documents from Vatican 2.

Regarding real life, my original answer was met by replies of “real life” isn’t always punished, etc. Your question wasn’t about “real life”, was it? It was about books, which I answered in terms of fiction. Any language is a metaphor, whether we are writing about history, fantasy, biography, news articles, a technical paper…any words we write or speak are metaphors. We can never express exactly what is in our minds, the thoughts and feelings, what we see, etc. We are agreed upon common vocabulary which holds societies together. That is why art, music, and literature will go on speaking for humanity. There will always be different and new ways to find a metaphor. It appears that by separating the contexts of what I was answering versus how my answer was received, I gave the impression that fiction is not about life.

 

[celtic_catholic_1]

Just my two cents.
What makes a book immoral? Anything that promotes that which is forbidden by the Church.

 

[Baelor]

In the first place, you asked what makes a book immoral. Maybe I shouldn’t have presumed that you meant fiction, but I jumped to that conclusion. I’ll leave it at that so that I can provide the clarification you requested.

That is what I meant; you assumed correctly.

was not taking a stand on whether a book should always be moral or not.

We are having a definitional problem here. If a book is immoral, then it should never have been written, because immorality is never acceptable, and an “immoral” book involves a violation of Church teaching through its composition. That is, the author of an immoral book has sinned by creating it. Thus, there is no such thing as a book that is permissibly immoral.

Also, OP, will you give us the benefit in your own words of what you mean by “immoral”?

See above.

Your question wasn’t about “real life”, was it?

If real life is relevant to fiction, then yes, it was.

 

[edwest2]

My sole indicator for this, is when vices are portrayed as virtues.

Otherwise, I feel anything goes, and nothing should be censored.

That is an amazing statement. Of the tens of thousands of new books published every year, you would not judge them on an individual basis? Would you say the same about movies?

That is is simply ignoring Catholic teaching as Catholic art should not reflect life as the mainstream media does. They revel in paganism and anti-Christian diatribes. There clearly are books that violate the conscience of every practicing Catholic.

Art does not confer upon the artist total immunity from criticism. The artist is a person with nothing more than a desire to do what too many find special. I’m never going to be a singer or a bodybuilder, but much is made of their behavior, as celebrities, if they cross moral lines.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Also a good reference:

Inter Mirifica from Vatican II.

On the purpose of art:

Thank you. I’m going to keep that for future reference.

Peace,
Ed